From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Homburger v. Geschwind

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
May 19, 1980
75 A.D.2d 864 (N.Y. App. Div. 1980)

Opinion

May 19, 1980


In a malpractice action, defendant appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County, dated January 7, 1980, which (1) denied his motion to dismiss the action for failure to serve a complaint, and (2) granted plaintiff's cross motion to require him to accept the complaint. Order reversed, on the law, without costs or disbursements, defendant's motion to dismiss the action is granted and plaintiff's cross motion is denied. In opposing defendant's dismissal motion brought pursuant to CPLR 3012 (subd [b]), plaintiff failed to demonstrate a reasonable excuse for the delay and to establish the legal merit of her claim through evidentiary facts attested to by individuals with personal knowledge. Consequently, the denial of defendant's motion was an abuse of discretion (Barasch v. Micucci, 49 N.Y.2d 594). Gulotta, J.P., Cohalan, Margett and O'Connor, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Homburger v. Geschwind

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
May 19, 1980
75 A.D.2d 864 (N.Y. App. Div. 1980)
Case details for

Homburger v. Geschwind

Case Details

Full title:ANNA HOMBURGER, Respondent, v. MAX GESCHWIND, Appellant

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department

Date published: May 19, 1980

Citations

75 A.D.2d 864 (N.Y. App. Div. 1980)

Citing Cases

Mintz v. Grossman

Moreover, even if the summons had been served in a timely manner, dismissal would have, nevertheless, been…